Unable To Get A Water Meter Fitted

loveangel

Fluffi

You can only run the water constantly is it is part of a medical treatment for your insomnia as wasting water is a criminal offence - remarkably! that's if consumers are doing it - however if teh water companies are doing it and it's proved little or nothing happens unless they deny it in which case they get fined a few million quid.
It is however perfactly legal to supply water at cost price(free if you are not on a mater) to a neighbour to water their garden or indeed fill their mega size swimming pool - indeed as i have a large flat i am thinking of popping down to argos and buying an inflatable swimming pool for every room in my flat and changing teh water twice a day. I will replace my beds with water beds and make sure the water is nice and fresh every night.
i am going to take in some new tenants - rent free on condition that they drink 1000 gallons of water a day and flush the toilet at least 200 times and have 100 cold baths a day.

Horace

you will find that different water authirites have a different idea of fair, for example anglian water haver the simple common sense to request a copy of your council tax bill shoing a single person discount and charge you for a single person, however thames water being owned by foriegners from the continent charge you based on the number of possible people that could live in your property effectively a ghost tax.
clearly where you are the water authority is very reasonable in their assessed charge at aroudn £100 however Thames water woudl rather have £266 for a single person use. it seems to me that they are greedy sods in a market that is clearly not open to competition and thames water have a monopoly of the highest concentration of bathaholic water users in the UK if not europe.
The shocking thing is that it was OfWat that stupidly advised water companies to base the assessed charges on the number of rooms as opposed to the number of occupants - clearly fair minded water companies such as Anglian have taken the view that OfWat is simple off it's rocker and ignored the guidance as have many other water authorities.
The government is so concerned at the assessed charges and other issues that it has set up an enquiry through DEFRA from this august.

there are numerous water companies around the country that only charge for the average use for single occupiers but the policy differences between water companies is like the differences between political parties - just like livingstones freebie 50% discount for income support collectors london travel - thames water offers fixed rates for those that use more water than they can afford especially those on income support spawning hoodie yobs at a prolific rate - who will enjoy free travel themselves to inflict misery on decent tax-paying londoners.
It would be nice to see Thames water take the stance of Boris johnson and operate a non-discriminatory regime whereby a single peoson gets a single rate regardless of whether they are criminals permanently on the dole or decent citizens - certainly there shoudl be no assumption that those on benefits are worse off than a single person struggling to pay council tax and bills iincluding water rates on a minimal wage - too proud to scrounge housing or council tax benefits off the state like millions of old age pensionser up and down the country, who would be too ashamed to claim these benefits, having worked all their lives.
a petition to thames water should do the trick asking them why they favour customers who contribute little or nothing to the economy over those who have worked all their lives and are likely to have pensions and other investments in thames water.
The water regulations specifically state 'there is no undue discrimination or preference in a company's water and sewerage charges.'
yet to my mind that is exactly what there is if those on income support are allowed to have capped water rates while everyone else pays for them.
Unfortiunately the Water Industry Act 1999 allows for such discrimination http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1999/ukpga_19990009_en_1
(d) require special provision, including exemption from specified charges, to be made for the purpose of assisting individuals who are or would be liable to pay any charges and who fall within any class of individuals appearing to the Secretary of State to require special provision.
presumably those individuals are those most likely to vote labour and include everyone on benefits, just out of prison, on incapacity benefit for alcoholism or drug use etc; but almost certainl;y not hard working single people being nailed by this modern day window tax!

Horace

loveangel - perhaps you should consider moving to a different part of the country? Admittedly, you would either to have to find alternative employment or commute.

It is unfortunate that all water companies look at the property that you live in and whether or not you flush the toilet 100 times a day or if you run a dishwasher or washing machine. For several months I never had a washing machine and did all my washing the old fashioned way - in the sink.

Come to the Midlands where we have Severn Trent Water, our house prices are cheaper but alas we have no Boris Johnson:rolleyes: Our petrol is cheaper too with my local garage charging 110p for a litre of unleaded fuel - far better than London where I believe the average price is still 118.9p.

I have it on good authority that although a water bed may seem an ideal prospect it is in fact rather cold and in this day and age people cannot afford to pay to heat their homes let alone their beds. Do you realise that our economy is as bad now as it was in 1992 when John Major was in power?

Perhaps a new government will help as they will spend wisely and not send billions to Africa to help the starving. One asks why they are starving - after all you only need to look at the pictures on the television to see that it is only the children who are affected and not their parents who appear as a picture of health. I would much rather our government spend money a lot closer to home and reduce the taxes that they charge us, repair the roads and make our water and other utilities cheaper.

loveangel

Interesting you bring up the colossal amounts of uk taxpayers money that is siphoned off to support socialist ideals abroad.
i woudl have though that if labour want to be good socialists they should follow china's example and restrict the number and sex of children per person unless you can fully support yourself and yoru family - after all I and most taxpayers do not want to support a growing underclass of pot-smoking, crack-sniffing, knife-weilding, thieves and rapists spawned from the loins of layabout slobs.
I think the solution is simple if you are not working and haven't worked for years you get sterilised or get 6 monthly injections of contraceptive(as most underclasses tend to forget to take the pill when they are on the housing waiting list!) as a measure to be taken for national security to prevent, crime;
To save a fortune on foreign aid these injesctions will also prevent the spread of aids - less babies = less possible infections and if they have less babaies they will in theory take more care of them, all gesticulation shoudl only occur with artifical insemination - sexual intercourse should be banned until aids/hiv is controlled or a cure is found. It should be made a criminal offence punishable by death to have unprotected sex if you are HIV positive - none of this EC put em in prison after they have infected hundreds -public execution - after all they will have the opportunity to infect others in prison no doubt so you woudl just be protecting the public.

Every person with AIDS that takes refuge in the UK costs us on average £250,000 a year, so if all the ASids sufferers in africa came to the UK and demanded treatment on the NHS as many do now under labour from all over the world, then the economic meltdown we have now would be nothing in comparison.
The actual figures of teh costs of labour allowing ten s of thousands of aids sufferers from abroad to get free treatment in the UK is kept secret, but it is a bombshell waiting to explode.

there are many people in the UK who have aids through no fault of their own and they should not have to wait a t the back of the queue for rationaed treatment or be told that there is no money for better new treatments because th government has allowed in ten of thousands of illegal immigrants who are getting free aids treatment and so there is no money left.
the NHS is a life boat it can only save so many it cannot be expected to treat europe and the rest of the world just because labour does not like refusing freebies.

TheDink

We tried to get a water meter earlier this year but it cannot be fitted as we share a mains pipe with the house next door, and the internal stop !!!! is too close to the floor. As soon as the report was sent back to the water company, we called them and chased up an application for an assessed charge, which you should be able to have in place of the standard charge. For us it reduced the water bill from £826 to £455 for the year (based on a 2 person occupancy). Water bills are notoriously high in the south west!

socialjusticenotcharity

loveangel wrote: »

Interesting you bring up the colossal amounts of uk taxpayers money that is siphoned off to support socialist ideals abroad.
i woudl have though that if labour want to be good socialists they should follow china's example and restrict the number and sex of children per person unless you can fully support yourself and yoru family - after all I and most taxpayers do not want to support a growing underclass of pot-smoking, crack-sniffing, knife-weilding, thieves and rapists spawned from the loins of layabout slobs.
I think the solution is simple if you are not working and haven't worked for years you get sterilised or get 6 monthly injections of contraceptive(as most underclasses tend to forget to take the pill when they are on the housing waiting list!) as a measure to be taken for national security to prevent, crime;
To save a fortune on foreign aid these injesctions will also prevent the spread of aids - less babies = less possible infections and if they have less babaies they will in theory take more care of them, all gesticulation shoudl only occur with artifical insemination - sexual intercourse should be banned until aids/hiv is controlled or a cure is found. It should be made a criminal offence punishable by death to have unprotected sex if you are HIV positive - none of this EC put em in prison after they have infected hundreds -public execution - after all they will have the opportunity to infect others in prison no doubt so you woudl just be protecting the public.

Every person with AIDS that takes refuge in the UK costs us on average £250,000 a year, so if all the ASids sufferers in africa came to the UK and demanded treatment on the NHS as many do now under labour from all over the world, then the economic meltdown we have now would be nothing in comparison.
The actual figures of teh costs of labour allowing ten s of thousands of aids sufferers from abroad to get free treatment in the UK is kept secret, but it is a bombshell waiting to explode.

there are many people in the UK who have aids through no fault of their own and they should not have to wait a t the back of the queue for rationaed treatment or be told that there is no money for better new treatments because th government has allowed in ten of thousands of illegal immigrants who are getting free aids treatment and so there is no money left.
the NHS is a life boat it can only save so many it cannot be expected to treat europe and the rest of the world just because labour does not like refusing freebies.

loveangel: where to begin with your misconceptions? 1. Birth control. That's Malthus' invention, an economist with ideas generally considered the antithesis of socialist analysis. You do a good job yourself of going even further than Malthus with your abhorent ideas of "sterilisation". The last bunch of ideologues who actually carried out this evil to support their racist ideology of hatred were, as I'm you are aware, the nazis. 2. Birth control in "good socialist" China. China has actually for the past 20 years followed the laws free-market fundamentalism adopted to the letter from the Chicago school. You will have a hard time associating genuine communism with that particular economic school. 3. The undeserving "underclass". All wealth (and poverty) is relative. Therefore the poorer you are, the more tax you are actually paying. That includes those on state benefits. Think about it. That is if you can drag your mind away from the genocidal gutter for two seconds.

socialjusticenotcharity

loveangel wrote: »

Interesting you bring up the colossal amounts of uk taxpayers money that is siphoned off to support socialist ideals abroad.
i woudl have though that if labour want to be good socialists they should follow china's example and restrict the number and sex of children per person unless you can fully support yourself and yoru family - after all I and most taxpayers do not want to support a growing underclass of pot-smoking, crack-sniffing, knife-weilding, thieves and rapists spawned from the loins of layabout slobs.
I think the solution is simple if you are not working and haven't worked for years you get sterilised or get 6 monthly injections of contraceptive(as most underclasses tend to forget to take the pill when they are on the housing waiting list!) as a measure to be taken for national security to prevent, crime;
To save a fortune on foreign aid these injesctions will also prevent the spread of aids - less babies = less possible infections and if they have less babaies they will in theory take more care of them, all gesticulation shoudl only occur with artifical insemination - sexual intercourse should be banned until aids/hiv is controlled or a cure is found. It should be made a criminal offence punishable by death to have unprotected sex if you are HIV positive - none of this EC put em in prison after they have infected hundreds -public execution - after all they will have the opportunity to infect others in prison no doubt so you woudl just be protecting the public.

Every person with AIDS that takes refuge in the UK costs us on average £250,000 a year, so if all the ASids sufferers in africa came to the UK and demanded treatment on the NHS as many do now under labour from all over the world, then the economic meltdown we have now would be nothing in comparison.
The actual figures of teh costs of labour allowing ten s of thousands of aids sufferers from abroad to get free treatment in the UK is kept secret, but it is a bombshell waiting to explode.

there are many people in the UK who have aids through no fault of their own and they should not have to wait a t the back of the queue for rationaed treatment or be told that there is no money for better new treatments because th government has allowed in ten of thousands of illegal immigrants who are getting free aids treatment and so there is no money left.
the NHS is a life boat it can only save so many it cannot be expected to treat europe and the rest of the world just because labour does not like refusing freebies.

loveangel: where to begin with your misconceptions? 1. Birth control. That's Malthus' invention, an economist with ideas generally considered the antithesis of socialist analysis. You do a good job yourself of going even further than Malthus with your abhorent ideas of "sterilisation". The last bunch of ideologues who actually carried out this evil to support their racist ideology of hatred were, as I'm you are aware, the nazis. 2. Birth control in "good socialist" China. China has actually for the past 20 years followed the laws free-market fundamentalism adopted to the letter from the Chicago school. You will have a hard time associating genuine communism with that particular economic school. 3. The undeserving "underclass". All wealth (and poverty) is relative. Therefore the poorer you are, the more tax you are actually paying. That includes those on state benefits. Think about it. That is if you can drag your mind away from the genocidal gutter for two seconds.